[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0e239ad4-3608-4ac1-be65-5b61329eba77@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 17:09:26 -0700
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Jeff Xu <jeffxu@...omium.org>, Shuah Khan
<shuah@...nel.org>
CC: Andrei Vagin <avagin@...gle.com>, Axel Rasmussen
<axelrasmussen@...gle.com>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Kees Cook
<kees@...nel.org>, Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...ux.dev>, "Liam R .
Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Muhammad Usama Anjum
<usama.anjum@...labora.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, Rich Felker
<dalias@...c.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] selftests/mm: kvm, mdwe fixes to avoid requiring
"make headers"
On 6/14/24 5:31 AM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 14.06.24 04:30, John Hubbard wrote:
...
>> +#ifndef PR_SET_MEMORY_MERGE
>> +#define PR_SET_MEMORY_MERGE 67
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef PR_GET_MEMORY_MERGE
>> +#define PR_GET_MEMORY_MERGE 68
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#ifndef PR_SET_MDWE
>> +#define PR_SET_MDWE 65
>> +#define PR_MDWE_REFUSE_EXEC_GAIN (1UL << 0)
>> +#define PR_MDWE_NO_INHERIT (1UL << 1)
>> +#define PR_GET_MDWE 66
>> +#endif
>
> What's the reason we don't target "linux/prctl.h" here? :)
Very good point. This is the Old Way of fixing these up, and I overlooked
that even though I'm busy adding the New Way. :)
I'll change this to use a new tools/include/uapi/linux/prctl.h and post
a v3, thanks for pointing this out.
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
NVIDIA
Powered by blists - more mailing lists